Speaking as a non-American, you guys are fucked no matter which candidate gets in. There is no better or worse, only different shades of shit. We all have shit governments but the US really isnt that much better than a dictatorship, you get to vote but its for the same guy with a different coloured badge.
Bring bush back I say at least he entertained, we barely hear anything about Obama. I literally forgot he existed until this Snowden thing came up, and it seems like he has been taken over by a body snatcher since the last I saw him several years ago. _________________CFLAGS="-OmgWTFR1CE --fun-lol-loops --march=asmx86go"

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

_________________The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king

Not having the economic policies (to include Obamacare, etc.) of Obama would have been an improvement. I think both McCain and Romney would have chosen a different path than Obama.

In that regard, I believe McCain would have been worse than Romney, because McCain doesn't inherently believe that government needs to be reduced to bring spending under control.

Romney would probably have cut spending more, but wouldn't have likely pushed far enough beyond what he thought was "what the people wanted" (example: working to implement socialist health care when Governor of MA. BTW, the end result was not what he preferred, it was modified by the Democrat controlled state congress).

In the case of McCain, I doubt he would have been reelected because I think he would have been blamed for the economy,* with neither side being satisfied enough to reelect.

* A failure to recover would certainly be his fault, and it is without a doubt Obama's fault, but his flock sees his doctrine as less fallible than the Pope's._________________lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

I've said it before. My left slipper would have been an improvement over Obama._________________"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P. J. O'Rourke

I believe Romney has a much better understanding of the private sector.

It's pretty much an established fact. Obama's never worked in the private sector... ever. He never had any executive experience... ever. And it shows._________________"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P. J. O'Rourke

Probably McCain, as he's not a draft dodger. I can't respect any president or prime minister that hasn't been in the armed forces. Having a battle experience and a degree in something like economics, medicine, social sciences, or any science for that matter would be a plus. Lawyers are worst, because they always know how to fuck the system over for their benefit, which usually results in the opposite for voters._________________There is, a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. If that unborn, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be no escape from this here that is born, become, made and compounded. - Gautama Siddharta

Pretty pathetic when the Obama Zombies are reduced to asking, "Hey. Would you have been better off with X?", and half of them are like, "Uhhh... yeah, maybe."

That's not the question Democrats should be asking. They should be asking if they'd be better off with Dennis Kuccinich or Mike Gravel. (It's quite apparent that Hillary would have been just as bad as Obama.)_________________History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. -- Abba Eban

Who else could testify before Congress with teleprompter glasses on and still fuck it up?_________________History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. -- Abba Eban

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

haha, beautiful

Quote:

I believe Romney has a much better understanding of the private sector.

moreover he has a much better understanding of sexuality and religion..._________________"I want to see gamma rays! I want to hear X-rays! Do you see the absurdity of what I am? I can't even express these things properly because I have to conceptualize complex ideas in this stupid limiting spoken language!"

I believe Romney has a much better understanding of the private sector.

moreover he has a much better understanding of sexuality and religion...

Why mislead? You don't think he understands sexuality. He does, however, have a much better understanding of economics than either Obama or you._________________"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P. J. O'Rourke

Why mislead? You don't think he understands sexuality. He does, however, have a much better understanding of economics than either Obama or you.

it's irony, not misleading... and irony because I can't take someone seriously if he thinks like Romney. I admit that my position is kind of wrong too, because only because somebody is a retard when it comes to sexuality or religion it doesn't mean he could not be a good scientist or a good politician or whatever.

be honest, if you forget your subjective feelings against obama (and probably even some objective facts), can you take romney seriously?

btw, how can one measure economical (or any other) understanding?_________________"I want to see gamma rays! I want to hear X-rays! Do you see the absurdity of what I am? I can't even express these things properly because I have to conceptualize complex ideas in this stupid limiting spoken language!"

Last edited by LoTeK on Wed Jul 03, 2013 9:08 am; edited 1 time in total

Gee, I don't know. How can you measure one's ability to add and subtract?

difficult question too, but when it comes to arithmetic you can at least define some rules and notions as rigorously as possible and then you can apply this rules in finitely many steps and see if the result is correct or not.

when it comes to politics or economics (or philosophy and many other areas) we are far away from decide if someone is correct or not.

(I've edited my previous post after you replied with a question for you...)_________________"I want to see gamma rays! I want to hear X-rays! Do you see the absurdity of what I am? I can't even express these things properly because I have to conceptualize complex ideas in this stupid limiting spoken language!"

I'll just put it to you this way. Adults who live in the real world and have to deal with things like profits, deadlines, payroll, taxes, and other expenses understand economics better than law students who have spent their entire life living off of the government teat. Romney had an 80% success rate in rescuing companies that were headed towards bankruptcy. Obama has a nearly 100% failure rate in the companies he decided to prop up with stolen money from we the taxpayers._________________"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P. J. O'Rourke

I believe Romney has a much better understanding of the private sector.

Correction, that's where he's heavily invested, which is exactly why he'd be the biggest cronyist president ever. It'd be like all the Christmases at once for the 1%ers, funded by you and everyone else who isn't minted, while your wages plummet. Romney may know how to run a business, but he has no idea how to run a country. Any president who strongly favours the endless wants of businesses over the needs of the people is completely unfit for office._________________

juniper wrote:

you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.

Correction, that's where he's heavily invested, which is exactly why he'd be the biggest cronyist president ever. It'd be like all the Christmases at once for the 1%ers, funded by you and everyone else who isn't minted, while your wages plummet. Romney may know how to run a business, but he has no idea how to run a country. Any president who strongly favours the endless wants of businesses over the needs of the people is completely unfit for office.

Heavily invested? I was under the impression that involvement with Bain Capital was no longer the case. By that logic, then, anyone who has demonstrated success in the private sector is dubbed a cronyist. It's critically important that this line of thinking not be entertained.

It's also a fallacy to state that running a business and running a nation are all that separate. They have budgets. They both have revenue, and they both have expenses. This very fundamental fact is something Obama doesn't seem to comprehend. His return on investment for the 2009 stimulus bill has been very abysmal. It's something private sector shareholders would have never gone for, and the CEO who tried forcing it would have been fired.

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

haha, beautiful

Quote:

I believe Romney has a much better understanding of the private sector.

moreover he has a much better understanding of sexuality and religion...

Why do you care? Unless of course you need much coaxing out of your closet?
Furthermore, Romney was not against your freedom to suck cock, but against the same-sex marriage. Not so progressive, but still not the same. I am sure lots of people can live with that, if it gives them functional economy._________________“If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him”

I'll just put it to you this way. Adults who live in the real world and have to deal with things like profits, deadlines, payroll, taxes, and other expenses understand economics better than law students who have spent their entire life living off of the government teat. Romney had an 80% success rate in rescuing companies that were headed towards bankruptcy. Obama has a nearly 100% failure rate in the companies he decided to prop up with stolen money from we the taxpayers.

I agree with the "real world" vs law student statement. if the government "steels" my money then it's the same as if some companies or banks steel it.

Prenj wrote:

LoTeK wrote:

Naib wrote:

Churchill wrote:

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

haha, beautiful

Quote:

I believe Romney has a much better understanding of the private sector.

moreover he has a much better understanding of sexuality and religion...

Why do you care? Unless of course you need much coaxing out of your closet?
Furthermore, Romney was not against your freedom to suck cock, but against the same-sex marriage. Not so progressive, but still not the same. I am sure lots of people can live with that, if it gives them functional economy.

actually I don't care. But what I care about is human behavior. Did you recognize that regardless what president a country has, there are always people that have to grouch? of course when you loose your job it's the fault of the president.

maybe the lefties and righties should sit together sometimes and grouch together, because they are the same on different sides like pacino and deniro in heat._________________"I want to see gamma rays! I want to hear X-rays! Do you see the absurdity of what I am? I can't even express these things properly because I have to conceptualize complex ideas in this stupid limiting spoken language!"

Yes but in the blind pursuit of utopia where freedom to suck cock is not infringed upon, they neglected all other issues, and now that they have sucked the cocks, they complain about economy.
The reason it happens its bad karma. They are not men/women/memen/mewen enough to go out and wear t-shirt "I suck cock/munch carpet and I'm proud of it" but instead they have to pretend its something else and elect the Dumbo.

As in
"Oh noes he said homosexuality is unnatural, lets get this other guy in, I don't care that he bombs villages with drones, spies on everybody, persecutes journalists, gives our tax money to fucking vampires, lies every time he draws a breath, is clueless and spineless"
Very hypocritical. Driven by their own personal insecurities and immaturities, but projected as something else. Bad Karma._________________“If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him”

Last edited by Prenj on Thu Jul 04, 2013 10:21 am; edited 1 time in total

As in
"Oh noes he said homosexuality is unnatural, lets get this other guy in, I don't care that he bombs villages with drones, spies on everybody, persecutes journalists, gives our tax money to fucking vampires, lies every time he draws a breath, is clueless and spineless"
Very hypocritical. Driven by their own personal insecurities and immaturities, but projected as something else. Bad Karma.

well first I want to say that my first comment was stupid (or better: not serious / trolling ) especially because wswartzendruber wrote "I believe he ..."

and yes, since there are more important questions than "when can gays get married", it would be stupid to focus on this topic.

but the "spy stuff" would happen regardless of whom is president. information is power, people want power, people try to collect information.

of course the "bomb stuff" would happen too.

the "tax stuff" would probably happen in an other way or if not, than there would be some other injustices..._________________"I want to see gamma rays! I want to hear X-rays! Do you see the absurdity of what I am? I can't even express these things properly because I have to conceptualize complex ideas in this stupid limiting spoken language!"